Because of vermin’s ability to adapt to pesticides, pesticides become

Question

Because of vermin’s ability to adapt to pesticides, pesticides become ineffective after several years, and chemical companies have to develop new pesticides regularly. A new pesticide that proved highly effective against most species of vermin was developed recently with a unique chemical composition to which vermin will not be able to adapt. Clearly, the vermin problem for most farmers has been solved once and for all.

The argument above depends on which of the following assumptions?

(A) The new pesticide is cheaper than any pesticide previously developed.

(B) No other chemical company will develop a similar pesticide.

(C) No chemical company previously made erroneous claims about having developed pesticides that preclude the possibility of vermin adapting to them.

(D) Vermin are the most serious threat to crops.

(E) The new pesticide will be priced so that most farmers can afford it.

neha24 · Answer

E seems best -----The new pesticide will be priced so that most farmers can afford it.

TerryJones · Answer

Restated: There's a new pesticide vermin do not adapt to, which means the vermin problem has been solved.

(A) Whether or not it's cheaper, doesn't matter. It just has to be affordable.
(B) Competition doesn't affect whether this pesticide (or a similar one) would solve the vermin problem.
(C) Past problems with other pesticides are immaterial to whether this new one works.
(D) Irrelevant. The argument is only about vermin as a threat to cops.
(E) Best choice. If the pesticide is not affordable, farmers won't use it, and the vermin problem won't be solved.

pqhai · Answer

This is assumption question, specifically, defender assumption (Power Score CR bible)
Premise: Vermin can adapt pesticide.
Premise: new pesticide prevents Vermin to adapt pesticide.
Conclusion: New pesticide helps most farmers to solve the Vermin problem.

Assumption: Farmers must have ability to buy New pesticide. If Not, they cannot solve the Vermin problem.

Straight E.

aps15 · Answer

If you are stuck between C and E, C is incorrect as it questions the FACT/PREMISE. Secondly this is already used in the field. 
Secondly, using negation technique, C doesnt fill the gap between the premise and the conclusion whereas E demolishes it.

Temurkhon · Answer

The trick is that first the argument discusses adaptability and then goes to farmers

Conclusion: The vermin problem for most farmers has been solved once and for all

Assumption (defender): No limitation for the new pesticide to solve problems of farmers exists

C says that No experience shows that adaptability issue is not solved when declared (no words about farmers)

E says that price for new pesticide will be good for farmers to afford it (fits conclusion)

E

mvictor · Answer

I agree with the above comments:

The conclusion: the V problem of farmers is solved!

the author assumes that:
1. the farmers will afford the new pesticide

2. the new pesticide will actually be effective in real-time conditions

(A)The new pesticide is cheaper than any pesticide previously developed.
Even if it's cheaper than any pesticide previously developed, it can still be priced such that the farmers cannot afford it.

(B)No other chemical company will develop a similar pesticide.
irrelevant to the conclusion, although the more companies do develop, the more competition on the market, and thus the lower the prices would be.

(C) No chemical company previously made erroneous claims about having developed pesticides that preclude the possibility of vermin adapting to them.
even if companies made erroneous claims, the new one proved to be a successful one.

(D)Vermin are the most serious threat to crops.
well, yes, it is specified in the argument.

(E)The new pesticide will be priced so that most farmers can afford it.
if this choice is negated, the conclusion is shattered and no longer stands.

E thus is the best answer.

daboo343 · Answer

Because of vermin’s ability to adapt to pesticides, pesticides become ineffective after several years, and chemical companies have to develop new pesticides regularly. A new pesticide that proved highly effective against most species of vermin was developed recently with a unique chemical composition to which vermin will not be able to adapt. Clearly, the vermin problem for most farmers has been solved once and for all.

The argument above depends on which of the following assumptions?
(A)The new pesticide is cheaper than any pesticide previously developed.
(B)No other chemical company will develop a similar pesticide.
(C) No chemical company previously made erroneous claims about having developed pesticides that preclude the possibility of vermin adapting to them.
(D)Vermin are the most serious threat to crops.
(E)The new pesticide will be priced so that most farmers can afford it.

Premise 1: Because of vermin’s ability to adapt to pesticides, pesticides become ineffective after several years, and chemical companies have to develop new pesticides regularly.
Premise 2: A new pesticide that proved highly effective against  most  species of vermin was developed recently with a unique chemical composition to which vermin will not be able to adapt.
Conclusion   the vermin problem for  most  farmers has been solved once and for all.  
from this it is clear that from Premise 2 authore is establishing his conclusion.

New pesticide highly effective and pest will not be able to adapt ---------->  Most  farmers' problems have been solved

Just think: How author has deduce the above said argument
Assumption 1: few of the remaining species of pesticide will not atack mot of the farmers crops.
Assumption 2: Farmers can afford this new pesticide.

Now POE.
(A) Incorrect The new pesticide is cheaper than any pesticide previously developed. The argument never talks about price.  This is the strengthner answer chice but definitely not an assumption.  Just negate the above statement. Even after negating we can see that the negated A does not shatter the conclusion
(B) Incorrect No other chemical company will develop a similar pesticide. Whether new compan will develop similar pesticide. It will not help conclusion in any way.
(C)  Incorrect No chemical company previously made erroneous claims about having developed pesticides that preclude the possibility of vermin adapting to them. Lets' assume few company has made erroneous claims about having developed pesticide..... So What? not helped us in any way
(D) Incorrect Vermin are the most serious threat to crops. We are not interested in seriousness abut pests.
(E)  Correct  The new pesticide will be priced so that most farmers can afford it.
 Bingo! It matches with our assumption.
Negate E to check whether Negated E shatters the conclusion
E') The new pesticide will be priced so   high   that most farmers cannot afford it.
E' shatters our conclusion 
Hence    E    is our answer.

VerbalBot · Answer

Automated notice from GMAT Club VerbalBot: 

A member just gave Kudos to this thread, showing it’s still useful. I’ve bumped it to the top so more people can benefit. Feel free to add your own questions or solutions.

 This post was generated automatically.

Because of vermin’s ability to adapt to pesticides, pesticides become

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

Because of vermin’s ability to adapt to pesticides, pesticides become

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards